BACKGROUND: While some argue that social network ties of individuals with alcohol use disorders (AUD) are robust, there is evidence to suggest that individuals with AUDs have few social network ties, which are a known risk factor for health and wellness. OBJECTIVES: Social network ties to friends, family, co-workers and communities of individuals are compared among individuals with a past-year diagnosis of alcohol dependence or alcohol abuse to individuals with no lifetime diagnosis of AUD. METHOD: Respondents from Wave 2 of the National Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol Related Conditions (NESARC) were assessed for the presence of past-year alcohol dependence or past-year alcohol abuse, social network ties, sociodemographics and clinical characteristics. RESULTS: Bivariate analyses showed that both social network size and social network diversity was significantly smaller among individuals with alcohol dependence, compared to individuals with alcohol abuse or no AUD. When social and clinical factors related to AUD status were controlled, multinomial logistic models showed that social network diversity remained a significant predictor of AUD status, while social network size did not differ among AUD groups. CONCLUSION: Social networks of individuals with AUD may be different than individuals with no AUD, but this claim is dependent on specific AUD diagnosis and how social networks are measured.
BACKGROUND: While some argue that social network ties of individuals with alcohol use disorders (AUD) are robust, there is evidence to suggest that individuals with AUDs have few social network ties, which are a known risk factor for health and wellness. OBJECTIVES: Social network ties to friends, family, co-workers and communities of individuals are compared among individuals with a past-year diagnosis of alcohol dependence or alcohol abuse to individuals with no lifetime diagnosis of AUD. METHOD: Respondents from Wave 2 of the National Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol Related Conditions (NESARC) were assessed for the presence of past-year alcohol dependence or past-year alcohol abuse, social network ties, sociodemographics and clinical characteristics. RESULTS: Bivariate analyses showed that both social network size and social network diversity was significantly smaller among individuals with alcohol dependence, compared to individuals with alcohol abuse or no AUD. When social and clinical factors related to AUD status were controlled, multinomial logistic models showed that social network diversity remained a significant predictor of AUD status, while social network size did not differ among AUD groups. CONCLUSION: Social networks of individuals with AUD may be different than individuals with no AUD, but this claim is dependent on specific AUD diagnosis and how social networks are measured.
Authors: Bridget F Grant; Deborah S Hasin; Frederick S Stinson; Deborah A Dawson; S Patricia Chou; W June Ruan; Boji Huang Journal: J Psychiatr Res Date: 2005-01 Impact factor: 4.791
Authors: Bridget F Grant; Deborah A Dawson; Frederick S Stinson; S Patricia Chou; Mary C Dufour; Roger P Pickering Journal: Drug Alcohol Depend Date: 2004-06-11 Impact factor: 4.492
Authors: Candyce H Kroenke; Yvonne L Michael; Xiao-Ou Shu; Elizabeth M Poole; Marilyn L Kwan; Sarah Nechuta; Bette J Caan; John P Pierce; Wendy Y Chen Journal: Psychooncology Date: 2016-01-08 Impact factor: 3.894